Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

There is a 1976 video of Russian airborne operations. There are rumors that Russians still maintain superior capabilities in terms of airborne operations and capable to insert a significant forces in no time. Are there any experts to comment?
1 posted on 07/27/2013 10:48:25 AM PDT by cunning_fish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: cunning_fish

Reminds me of Red Dawn I. “WOLVERINES!”


2 posted on 07/27/2013 10:57:10 AM PDT by rktman (Inergalactic background checks? King hussein you're first up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cunning_fish
The business of war is no place for anyone without a set.


3 posted on 07/27/2013 10:57:38 AM PDT by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cunning_fish

Didn’t help them in Afghanistan.


4 posted on 07/27/2013 10:59:34 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cunning_fish

Ahhhhh....the great dream. A vehicle small enough, and light enough, to fit in AF jet transport aircraft so it can move to the theater of operations at 500mph. It’s also large enough to house a crew of four and 10 Infantry Soldiers. It has enough armor to stop any know weapons from penetrating the armor anywhere on the vehicle. It can go 80mph cross-country. It has a cannon that can defeat all enemy vehicles. It can also fire artillery rounds. It has a built-in air defense system including radar detection. It can swim. It has total night and day detection and targeting systems in every direction. It is small enough to be a hard target to hit. It is maintenance free. It requires no fuel. It’s ground pressure is so low it can cross bogs and sand while high enough to provide great traction. I think the thing that comes closest to this is an E-Tool.


6 posted on 07/27/2013 11:16:05 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cunning_fish

I would want my enemy to land in a bunch, so that my artillery concentrate on them.

Of course I would love to have my enemy attempt to penetrate air defenses with IL-76 targets, too.


7 posted on 07/27/2013 11:20:18 AM PDT by donmeaker (Blunderbuss: A short weapon, ... now superceded in civilized countries by more advanced weaponry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cunning_fish

In Jump School they used to tell us of a never verified story/legend/myth, of the Soviet paratroopers being dropped without parachutes, into snow banks during the war with the Finns.


8 posted on 07/27/2013 11:24:57 AM PDT by ansel12 ( Santorum appeared on CBS and pronounced George Zimmerman guilty of murder, first degree. March-2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cunning_fish

Mass airborne drops were cutting edge in World War 2. There only use today is to scare small countries with little military capability. Being able to drop 20,000 troops inside a small countries borders can create havoc, but against the a larger country like China, Russia, or the US.....not so cutting edge. More like sending many highly motivated troops to there death.


9 posted on 07/27/2013 11:25:02 AM PDT by ScubieNuc (When there is no justice in the laws, justice is left to the outlaws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cunning_fish
There are rumors that Russians still maintain superior capabilities in terms of airborne operations and capable to insert a significant forces in no time.

They may very well have it, but it does them no good against a 1st-world or 2nd-world military that has modern air defense capabilities. Airborne operations these days are best suited against third world countries where you control all of the airspace and aren't facing many heavy weapons, at least not directly in the dropzone.
11 posted on 07/27/2013 11:44:42 AM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cunning_fish

I don’t know that anyone beyond historians are truly experts on Airborne operations and I was Airborne.

Modern day Airborne operations among the major powers are too risky for widespread use - placing that many elite soldiers on a cargo aircraft that is vulnerable to being shot down violates common sense if the opponent is formidable.

Airborne operations against small nations with little organization or anti-air capability can still be effective, but they always come with risks. Placing that many soldiers on any airframe over hostile territory is often an unneeded risks that is as much about putting a star on their jump wings as it is about gaining some tactical advantage.


15 posted on 07/27/2013 11:52:22 AM PDT by volunbeer (We must embrace austerity or austerity will embrace us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cunning_fish
There are rumors that Russians still maintain superior capabilities in terms of airborne operations and capable to insert a significant forces in no time. Are there any experts to comment?

There's no particular role for mass groups of parachute-dropped troops in modern warfare.

There's a romantic infatuation with "paratroopers" who are indeed generally elite due to their selectiveness and training,. but have always done the vast majority of their fighting arriving on the ground.

For the most part mass airborne assaults weren't all that effective in WWII and took astounding casualties. You just end up too scattered and too outgunned. It only works against very weak or no opposition (for example, the Ranger drop at the beginning of OEF). There was one drop in Iraq against almost no opposition in northern Iraq just so a brigade could get its jump badges.

18 posted on 07/27/2013 12:04:45 PM PDT by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cunning_fish

Why can’t anyone do a decent youtube video without setting it to crappy music?!?!


23 posted on 07/27/2013 1:05:14 PM PDT by Axenolith (Government blows, and that which governs least, blows least...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cunning_fish

No “Phony Sequester” to interfere with their training and no gaying to disrupt their units cohesion.


27 posted on 07/27/2013 2:03:49 PM PDT by fella ("As it was before Noah, so shall it be again,")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson